Connect with us

Current Affairs

Kamala Harris accepts Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, calls for unity and action

Published

3 weeks ago

on

CHICAGO, UNITED STATES: In a historic moment that marks a significant milestone in American politics, Kamala Harris officially accepted the Democratic Party’s nomination for President of the United States on the final day of the Democratic National Convention.

The acceptance speech, delivered on Thursday night (22 August), concluded a whirlwind month of political developments, beginning with President Joe Biden’s unexpected decision to withdraw from the 2024 presidential race and endorse Harris as his successor.

A Historic Nomination

Harris, the first woman of color to be nominated for the presidency by a major U.S. political party, stood before a charged audience, acknowledging the weight of the moment.

“On behalf of the people, on behalf of every American, regardless of party, race, gender, or the language your grandmother speaks, on behalf of my mother and everyone who has ever set out on their own unlikely journey… I accept your nomination for president of the United States of America,” Harris declared, as the room erupted in applause and cheers, a testament to the historic nature of her candidacy.

Harris’s nomination represents not only a personal achievement but also a significant moment for the Democratic Party, which has been working to build a more inclusive and diverse political platform.

Her rise to the top of the Democratic ticket reflects the growing influence of women and people of color within the party, as well as a broader shift in American politics towards greater representation of historically marginalized groups.

The Biden Endorsement and Party Unity

President Joe Biden’s decision to step aside and endorse Harris was a pivotal moment in this election cycle.

Biden, who served as vice president under Barack Obama and won the presidency in 2020, has been a central figure in American politics for decades. His endorsement of Harris was seen as a move to unify the party and bring together its various factions, particularly as the Democratic Party faces a challenging election against a resurgent Republican Party.

In her speech, Harris who currently serves as vice president, paid tribute to Biden, expressing her gratitude for his support and reflecting on their shared journey.

“When I think about the path we have traveled together, Joe, I am filled with gratitude. Your record is inspiring, as history will show, and Doug and I love you, and Jill, and are forever thankful to you both,” Harris said, referring to her husband Doug Emhoff and Biden’s wife, Jill Biden.

An Emotional Reflection on Family and Values

Harris’s acceptance speech was deeply personal, as she recounted her upbringing and the influence of her parents on her life and career.

She shared memories of her mother, Shyamala Gopalan, an Indian immigrant and a prominent cancer researcher, and her father, Donald Harris, a Jamaican-American economist. The virtues instilled in her by her parents, she said, have guided her throughout her career and shaped her vision for the country.

“My early memories of our parents together are very joyful ones, a home filled with laughter and music, Aretha, Coltrane, and Miles at the park. My mother would say, stay close. But my father would say, as he smiled, run, Kamala, run. Don’t be afraid. Don’t let anything stop you,” Harris recalled, painting a vivid picture of her formative years.

Harris also spoke about the pivotal moment that led her to pursue a career in law and eventually become a prosecutor.

She recounted the story of her high school friend, Wanda, who confided in Harris about being sexually abused by her stepfather. This experience, Harris said, ignited her passion for justice and solidified her decision to become a prosecutor, determined to protect vulnerable people like Wanda.

“When it came time to choose the type of law I would pursue, I reflected on a pivotal moment in my life. You see, when I was in high school, I noticed something about my best friend, Wanda. She was sad at school, and there were times she didn’t want to go home. So, one day, I asked if everything was all right, and she confided in me that she was being sexually abused by her stepfather, and I immediately told her she had to come stay with us, and she did,” Harris shared, her voice filled with emotion.

A Vision for America’s Future

Harris’s speech was not only a reflection on her personal journey but also a call to action for the nation. She outlined her vision for the country, emphasizing the importance of unity, justice, and progress. Harris framed the upcoming election as a critical moment in American history, a chance to move beyond the divisions that have plagued the nation in recent years.

“Our nation, with this election, has a precious, fleeting opportunity to move past the bitterness, cynicism, and divisive battles of the past… to chart a new way forward not as members of any one party or faction, but as Americans,” Harris stated, making a direct appeal to moderate and independent voters who are likely to play a crucial role in the outcome of the election.

Harris also made it clear that she intends to be a president for all Americans, regardless of their political affiliations.

“And let me say, I know there are people of various political views, and I want you to know I promise to be a president for all Americans. You can always trust me to put country above party and self, to hold sacred America’s fundamental principles, from the rule of law, to free and fair elections, to the peaceful transfer of power,” she assured the audience, drawing a sharp contrast with her opponent, Donald Trump.

Addressing Global Issues: Gaza Conflict and U.S. Foreign Policy

One of the most anticipated parts of Harris’s speech was her address on the ongoing conflict in Gaza, a deeply divisive issue within the Democratic Party. Harris took a firm stance, signaling her administration’s support for a ceasefire while reaffirming the U.S.’s commitment to Israel’s security.

“With respect to the war in Gaza, President Biden and I are working around the clock, because now is the time to get a hostage deal and a ceasefire deal done,” Harris stated. She condemned the October 7 attack by Hamas and emphasized the need for Israel to defend itself while also acknowledging the immense suffering in Gaza.

“At the same time, what has happened in Gaza over the past 10 months is devastating. So many innocent lives lost, desperate, hungry people fleeing for safety, over and over again, the scale of suffering is heartbreaking,” she said, bringing the audience to their feet with her declaration of the need for both security for Israel and dignity and self-determination for the Palestinian people.

As Harris voiced her support for Israel, several attendees in different sections of the arena shouted, “Free Palestine.” However, their chants were soon overpowered by the cheers of her supporters.

A Strong Stand Against Autocracy

Harris did not shy away from addressing the global rise of autocracy, directly criticizing former President Donald Trump for his approach to foreign leaders like North Korea’s Kim Jong Un.

“I will not cozy up to tyrants and dictators like Kim Jong Un who are rooting for Trump,” Harris declared, accusing Trump of being “easy to manipulate with flattery and favors” and warning that he “won’t hold autocrats accountable because he wants to be an autocrat himself.”

As red, white, and blue balloons began to fall from the ceiling, Harris wrapped up her speech with a soaring appeal to the nation’s values and the importance of the upcoming election. “Fellow Americans, I love our country with all my heart… Everywhere I go, in everyone I meet, I see a nation that is ready to move forward, ready for the next step in the incredible journey that is America,” she said.

“Let us show each other and the world who we are and what we stand for: Freedom, opportunity, compassion, dignity, fairness, and endless possibilities,” Harris concluded. “Let’s fight for it. Let’s get out there. Let’s vote for it, and together, let us write the next great chapter in the most extraordinary story ever told.”

Looking Ahead

With the convention now over, Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, will embark on a nationwide campaign to win over voters in what promises to be a highly contentious and closely watched election. As the first woman of color to lead a major party’s ticket, Harris’s candidacy represents a significant moment in American history, and her vision for the future of the country will undoubtedly be a central theme as the campaign progresses.

The Democratic Party, energized by Harris’s nomination and the unity displayed at the convention, now faces the challenge of convincing the American people that their vision for the country’s future is the right one.

As the campaign trail heats up to 5 November, all eyes will be on Harris and Walz as they make their case to the voters and strive to lead the country into its next chapter.

The post Kamala Harris accepts Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, calls for unity and action appeared first on Gutzy Asia.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
1 Comment
Subscribe
Notify of
1 Comment
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Reforming Singapore’s defamation laws: Preventing legal weapons against free speech

Opinion: The tragic suicide of Geno Ong, linked to the financial stress from a defamation lawsuit, raises a critical issue: Singapore’s defamation laws need reform. These laws must not be weaponized to silence individuals.

Published

1 week ago

on

9 September 2024

By

by Alexandar Chia

This week, we hear the tragic story of the suicide of Geno Ong, with Ong citing the financial stress from the defamation lawsuit against her by Raymond Ng and Iris Koh.

Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong, this Koh/Ng vs Ong affair raises a wider question at play – the issue of Singapore’s defamation laws and how it needs to be tightened.

Why is this needed? This is because defamation suits cannot be weaponised the way they have been in Singapore law. It cannot be used to threaten people into “shutting up”.

Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution may permit laws to be passed to restrict free speech in the area of defamation, but it does not remove the fact that Article 14(1)(a) is still law, and it permits freedom of speech.

As such, although Article 14(2)(a) allows restrictions to be placed on freedom of speech with regard to the issue of defamation, it must not be to the extent where Article 14(1)(a)’s rights and liberties are not curtailed completely or heavily infringed on.

Sadly, that is the case with regard to precedence in defamation suits.

Let’s have a look at the defamation suit then-PM Goh Chok Tong filed against Dr Chee Soon Juan after GE 2001 for questions Dr Chee asked publicly about a $17 billion loan made to Suharto.

If we look at point 12 of the above link, in the “lawyer’s letter” sent to Dr Chee, Goh’s case of himself being defamed centred on lines Dr Chee used in his question, such as “you can run but you can’t hide”, and “did he not tell you about the $17 billion loan”?

In the West, such lines of questioning are easily understood at worse as hyperbolically figurative expressions with the gist of the meaning behind such questioning on why the loan to Suharto was made.

Unfortunately, Singapore’s defamation laws saw Dr Chee’s actions of imputing ill motives on Goh, when in the West, it is expected of incumbents to take the kind of questions Dr Chee asked, and such questions asked of incumbent office holders are not uncommon.

And the law permits pretty flimsy reasons such as “withdrawal of allegations” to be used as a deciding factor if a statement is defamatory or not – this is as per points 66-69 of the judgement.

This is not to imply or impute ill intent on Singapore courts. Rather, it shows how defamation laws in Singapore needs to be tightened, to ensure that a possible future scenario where it is weaponised as a “shut-up tool”, occurs.

These are how I suggest it is to be done –

  1. The law has to make mandatory, that for a case to go into a full lawsuit, there has to be a 3-round exchange of talking points and two attempts at legal mediation.
  2. Summary judgment should be banned from defamation suits, unless if one party fails to adduce evidence or a defence.
  3. A statement is to be proven false, hence, defamatory, if there is strictly material along with circumstantial evidence showing that the statement is false. Apologies and related should not be used as main determinants, given how many of these statements are made in the heat of the moment, from the natural feelings of threat and intimidation from a defamation suit.
  4. A question should only be considered defamatory if it has been repeated, after material facts of evidence are produced showing, beyond reasonable doubt, that the message behind the question, is “not so”, and if there is a directly mentioned subject in the question. For example, if an Opposition MP, Mr A, was found to be poisoned with a banned substance, and I ask openly on how Mr A got access to that substance, given that its banned, I can’t be found to have “defamed the government” with the question as 1) the government was not mentioned directly and 2) if the government has not produced material evidence that they indeed had no role in the poisoning affair, if they were directly mentioned.
  5. Damages should be tiered, with these tiers coded into the Defamation Act – the highest quantum of damages (i.e. those of a six-figured nature) is only to be reserved if the subject of defamation lost any form of office, revenue or position, or directly quantifiable public standing, or was subjected to criminal action, because of the act of defamation. If none of such occur, the maximum amount of damages a plaintiff in a defamation can claim is a 4-figure amount capped at $2000. This will prevent rich and powerful figures from using defamation suits and 6-figure damages to intimidate their questioners and detractors.
  6. All defendants of defamation suit should be allowed full access to legal aid schemes.

Again, this piece does not suggest bad-faith malpractice by the courts in Singapore. Rather, it is to suggest how to tighten up defamation laws to avoid it being used as the silencing hatchet.

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun

A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.

Published

2 weeks ago

on

3 September 2024

By

SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.

The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.

The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.

Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.

The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.

The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.

If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.

In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.

They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.

The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.

The investigation is ongoing.

Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.

Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.

The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.

Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.

However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.

The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.

Continue Reading

Trending